If its semi-auto and you can GRIP it, it's banned!!!

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!! Most of all pay no attention to Feinstein's "specific" list of banned weapons. That list means
absolutely nothing and is nothing more than a ruse.

I read this earlier this morning and just could not believe it. Thankfully someone is paying attention out their in cyber world because you probably
have not heard this yet. If you have, please share your thoughts.

The article cited covers many extreme flaws in Feinstein's legislation. However, I am focusing on the worst of them.

All semi-autos are outlawed, not just some. Pro-rights and anti-rights attention has been focused on the tremendous list of guns that would be
banned under Feinstein’s bill, which takes up a significant portion of the 122 pages of this proposal.

Here’s the problem none of the “news” reports have spotted:

The list of guns doesn’t matter.

Magazine size doesn’t matter.

If the semi-auto firearm has anything to grip it by, it is banned. (There is a grandfather clause for old stuff.)

It’s very clever actually.

According to the bill, any semiautomatic firearm that uses a magazine — handgun, rifle or shotgun — equipped with a “pistol grip,” would be
banned. That sounds like a limitation, but it is not.

A pistol grip (on page 2) is defined (on page 13) as “a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In
other words, the gun list does not matter. It is a smokescreen designed to distract people from the true meaning of the bill. And it has done a
magnificent job. It worked!

Any semi-automatic firearm that exists, with anything on it you can grip, is banned.

The list is meaningless tripe. It is camouflage for the real purpose of the bill. When the president said he is not going to take away your guns,
well, Feinstein’s bill puts the lie to that.

Yes, that includes all semi auto pistols too!!!!

P.S. There is a section in Feinstein’s bill referring to “grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapons” illegal under federal law section
922(v). Someone should tell her lawyers that 922(v) expired eight years ago and is no longer valid, so that section makes no sense, doesn’t describe
anything, and someone should slap those lawyers upside the head. It’s a small point.

I hope they keep it up. It is political suicide and will result in them losing seats in the Senate next election cycle. I doubt many Democrats will
actually vote for it. Maybe the really stupid ones will. Maybe if they are retiring anyway they will.

I would think that would would have to "grip" any type of firearm in order to hold it.

Fienstiens ban would also lump lever action rifles into the assualt weapons ban. And as previously noted by many others, then of course, bolt action
hunting rifles will become "Sniper" rifles before to long.

Nothing addresses criminals — everything is aimed at innocent people who haven’t done anything wrong. There is not even any “malum in se”
(legalese for intent to do wrong) or criminal intention. It is all “malum prohibitum” (wrong because we say so), the worst kind of bureaucratic
and government abuse — crime by decree. The critics appear to be right. This is not about gun control, it is purely about control. The bill simply
removes the right to own property Americans currently own.

Despite labels that warn psychotropic drugs may cause psychotic episodes, suicidal tendencies, manic behavior, sudden death and various social and
psychological disturbances, this is unaddressed in the democrat’s proposed solution to mass murder by people hopped up on psychologically prescribed
medications. Reports indicate that virtually all the mass murders were “deaths under the influence” (DUI) it is missing in the bill, an omission
of Feinsteinian proportions. (The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International has a researched list of perps and their drugs here:
www.cchrint.org...)

This one has already been discussed around ATS

7. Constitutional validity

Every aspect of this bill appears to be an infringement on the Bill Of Rights, with no legitimate justification. Congress cannot pass infringements by
majority vote. That is forbidden, although the word “infringement” itself is universally missing in “news” reports, in case you haven’t
noticed.

But, but, but the people's on the TV and internet keep saying nobody is coming for our guns, they aren't trying to ban them, it's just a renewed
1994 ban bla bla bla. Are you telling me these people are LYING to me?

They are leaving it vague for this very reason.... They will just move the goal posts as they go along....

The main focus seems to rid us of our semi automatic weapons in general. The legislation makes no mention whatsoever regarding revolvers which
certainly have "grips" and which can commonly hold up to 7 rounds and can be reloaded quickly with a speed loader or moon clips. Yet they focus on
10 round magazines and semi autos for some reason.. It makes no sense... 7 rounds of .44 vs. 10 rounds of 9mm or .380 blah blah..

Its a mess... I just hope our fearless reps. on the hill thoroughly understand it all...

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.